Study find trans kids thrive after early transition

There's something uniquely distasteful about grown adults who advocate for the sterilisation of children.

they are going to continually post studies to divert peoples' energy and time.

This is a technique called Gish Galloping. Believe me, we scientists are used to it...

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop

These drugs are powerful. If you want to look up the side effects they’re all easily googleable: Lupron and triptorelin are two of the main ones. They have AWFUL side effects.

Then the cross sex hormones come with their own risks of all sorts of things including a raise in lifetime cancer risk. The risks of very low dose hormones in the appropriate sex are still being evaluated. For example lifetime risks of hormonal contraceptives. Oestrogen in particular is like rocket fuel to a number of cancers. It’s going to be disastrous.

NO OTHER AREA of medicine gives these drugs out without serious clinical need. Many patients on these drugs (prostate patients for example) find he side effects intolerable. NO OTHER indication would be treated with such drastic measures when 80% of the patient pool is going to not even request them in a few years. This incidentally is to my mind WHY the suicide stats are so pressed by TRAs - it’s the only way they can pressure medics into doing this, to insinuate that the alternative is death.

This is going to be a major scandal - mark my words. In ten years time, when these kids are realising they were channelled down an irreversible pathway that resulted in sterility, mutilation and loss of sexual feeing they are going to sue. It’s going to be very sad.

I am deeply suspicious of any group or ideology that seeks to lie to children to say they can change sex, and that aims to sculpt them into permanent-childhood/adolescence. It’s incredibly disturbing.

I agree with @babieseverywhere on p2.

It is fucking outrageous that adults with metal health problems are allowed to promote sterilising children as if it is a thing.

They are going to continually post studies to divert peoples' energy and time

I don't this this is a waste of time. I'm out there talking with people about trans and women's rights issues, on social media and in real life, as I suspect are a lot of other people here.

It's really useful to hear about these studies for the first time here, so we can google and spend time considering it, not to have to think on the fly without google at hand.

There are a bunch of sealions about, sure but I don't think posting studies really falls into that category. I find it genuinely, really useful to see what studies are being done IMO.

There are NO studies of Lupron used on children because it is used off label.
There are however 20,000 or so Women in the US severely damaged by Lupron given for premature puberty, there are various support groups for them.

sleepingdragons I asked on the first page and just got a flippant non answer.

It is incorrect to say it's an issue because there's no science on this at present

Gah, I made a typo. That should say ' it's not an issue'

But puberty is not all about looks

One of the things it's about is brain development, maturing into an adult. What happens if you stunt that, does anyone know?

This is the one that concerns me most. Well that and sterility, losing the ability to breast feed and a functional sex life.

(The answer, for avoidance of doubt is no, no one knows how Lupron affects the brains of trans kids, no proper trials have been done).

I'm actually very grateful for Wakame posting all of these studies. It is very useful to see them thoroughly debunked by knowledgeable people, and helps give me the tools to critically analyse these things when I see them.

I am going to propose that no one else answers this thread ... Wakame is aiming to derail a Feminist Chat board... has done it before and is doing it again....Really great that Bowl has pasted one cogent response - Let's not add any more

I think it was useful to reply on this thread but generally I agree with this poster. They are going to continually post studies to divert peoples' energy and time. This isn't someone interested in debate. None of the studies posted by them have been robust or said very much of any use. We all know some people with gender dysphoria are helped by transitioning. The op seems to be under the impression we hate all transpeople and want to eradicate them which is completely false.

A belief that puberty is only about developing secondary sexual characteristics explains the statement about 'natural' puberty.

But puberty is not all about looks, unless you view it through the lens of the male gaze.

To clarify I meant there is no data

Indeed.

Lupron do NOT advise their product is used in this way. They can't, there have been no proper clinical trials of hormone blockers for trans kids.

the study says that these people are comparable to non-trans people of the same age - but that's not quite true if the non-trans people haven't had similar professional therapy and support is it?

Exactly.

long term cancer risk we don't really know about

To clarify I meant there is no data. We need to look at people over the next few decades for there to be any concrete answers on risks. It is incorrect to say it's an issue because there's no science on this at present

Its unfortunate that this is so often framed as 'trans issues', the issues concern everyone especially women and girls. We need to be able to talk about women and girls, especially those who are vulnerable

Agreed.

And sorry, you're right, that was clumsy language.

"The whole point is to allow the puberty which is natural to those involved."
Good. So you agree that children should be allowed to go through the natural puberty. Which their bodies will natural start without artificial intervention.

Fertility - Sperm and ova can be banked. Surrogacy is just as possible as it is for any gay couple and womb transplants etc are already in medical trials.

Puberty - the whole point is that they will go through the correct puberty for them, rather than the incorrect one. They are taking charge of their own bodies - something which has been a basic tenet of feminism for decades. They will therefore not retain pre-pubescent features.

They will be very capable of having a full sex life if they want.

On hormones, the change in osteoporosis risk is small and might even be decreased. There is no known link to diabetes.

Cancer is more complex because the risk is a trade off between prostrate and breast cancer, one increasing while the other decreases.

It is worth stating very plainly that much of the above is complete nonsense, to anyone who doesn't have any scientific knowledge of transitioning.

Given a boy cross-sex hormones will not make them go through 'correct puberty for them'. That is physically impossible. There is no evidence at all a boy can literally have a female brain. The end result might be the alleviating of a mental health condition but that is different to the body literally changing sex.

As said sperm and ova can't be banked if someone hasn't gone through puberty. If someone has done, eggs can only be frozen for 10 years in the UK and there are ethical issues around using surrogates.

Some trans people will be capable of having a full sex life. Great, good for them. Many won't because of complications from surgery or there being a limited number of willing partners. We simply don't know long term how adults will function if they have taken puberty blockers/cross-sex hormones from a young age. There isn't the data. I cannot imagine it having no impact on sexual functioning for many. Bottom surgery is occasionally botched or has serious complications.

The long term cancer risk we don't really know about but a transwoman will keep taking cross-sex hormones into old age which is nothing like experiencing the menopause.

Fertility - Sperm and ova can be banked.

There won’t BE any sperm or ova!

Surrogacy is just as possible as it is for any gay couple yup that’s true.

and womb transplants etc are already in medical trials.. Not cross sex they aren’t. The only successful one was mother to daughter.

Puberty - the whole point is that they will go through the correct puberty for them, rather than the incorrect one.They will therefore not retain pre-pubescent features. Yes they will. You don’t turn a boy into a woman by giving cross sex hormones. You don’t have a female puberty. You have a cessation or block of Male puberty followed by female associated hormones. It’s not the same as a female puberty undergone by a female.

They will be very capable of having a full sex life if they want they will not - a Male will have a micropenis, their sex organs will not be developed at all. How is a Male, with a micropenis, going to have a full sex life?

On hormones, the change in osteoporosis risk is small and might even be decreased. data I’ve seen is the opposite of that

There is no known link to diabetes. incorrect. Metabolic disturbances such as fat redistribution will have an influence on diabetic potential.

Cancer is more complex because the risk is a trade off between prostrate and breast cancer, one increasing while the other decreases. it’s so much more complex than that. Metabolic disturbances from blockers can potentially cause cancer. Cross sex hormones can cause a range of cancers, not just restricted to prostate and breast.

Controls means denying treatment to people whom the doctors believe would benefit from it. That raises huge medical ethics issues.

It's done in every other circumstance...

Controls could also be non-trans youth given access to therapy etc. - the study says that these people are comparable to non-trans people of the same age - but that's not quite true if the non-trans people haven't had similar professional therapy and support is it?

I mean, I was terribly unhappy as a 13 year old, I hated puberty, by 20 I was slowly starting to come into myself, but I didn't really get there until I was about 26-28 - it seems to me that this is provisionally showing that there's no difference, and that's the best they can show.

I'm sorry but I totally disagree with this. We often discuss trans issues in FWR and it's useful to hear the other "side".

There is a balance to be found though and one which is often difficult to maintain.

For example a recent thread (below) had important examples of how women, girls & charities supporting vulnerable people were affected by legislation which was designed to protect the rights of people who were transgender. The implications are serious and discussion of this is made difficult by those who might consider themselves 'the other side'.

Its unfortunate that this is so often framed as 'trans issues', the issues concern everyone especially women and girls. We need to be able to talk about women and girls, especially those who are vulnerable.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3266198-No-True-Transwoman-transadvocates-question-whether-TW-is-genuine-after-said-TW-sexually-harasses-women-in-homeless-shelter

Controls means denying treatment to people

What if children were given access to all the support and validation trans kids got for transition, for their other conditions?

Not a control group as such, but without this kind of comparison you can't say what's down to actual transition and what's down to making these children just feel respected and valued and part of something.

Incidentally, was there a study to look at how their brains responded to puberty?

How does Lupron affect the natural brain development that happens when kids go through puberty -if we're suppressing puberty? Does anyone know?

Controls means denying treatment to people

No they don’t. VERY few clinical trials use placebo alone in the control arm. Trial design is a field in itself, but for something like a cancer trial it’s not designed like one group get nothing and one get treated. A more likely design would be current gold standard treatment in the control arm and then either that plus study drug or study drug alone or something else for the active arm. Most trials these days have multiple arms (it gets pretty complex) but you cannot disadvantage a patient in a trial.

"After gender reassignment, in young adulthood, the GD was alleviated and psychological functioning had steadily improved. Well-being was similar to or better than same-age young adults from the general population. Improvements in psychological functioning were positively correlated with postsurgical subjective well-being."

The key is long term well being though.

The youngsters who have transitioned may well have had a whole host of cormorbid conditions between them, for example anorexia, trying to escape abuse, autism, depression etc.

Transition is a massive intervention, and given the current climate, involves much more than the actual blockers and surgery. It can also involve

• counselling
• online communities who are accepting and who validate and empower you
• the feeling you're part of something important and bigger than you - the trans movement
• a massive feeling of accomplishment for having managed to achieve transition
• schools taking you seriously and rearranging things to accommodate you
• finding your "tribe" - other trans kids who understand you

How much of that is available to anorexics, or abuse survivors, or kids with depression?

At the beginning of transition, they haven't had to deal with things like repeated surgeries, coming to terms with being infertile as an adult, or being unable to breastfeed their children, the awareness that they lack sexual function, a smaller dating pool, perhaps even the realisation they were gay all along, not trans.

I don't doubt that transition might make teenage years easier for GNC kids. But at what price. Suffering throughout adulthood? Sterility. FFS?! This is barbaric.

What we should be asking, is is there another way for those kids to be happier in themselves without the need for such drastic intervention as hormones and chopping bits of their bodies off?